michael chugani

Stupid Thambi Choo-Choogani

So Hong Kong is both unhappy and in crisis. Gosh! We didn’t know that! We thought all along that money is the root of all unhappiness. Or is it the love of money… we are confused. Blame ourselves; not reading the Bible enough or go to Sunday school.

But, please, Choo-Choogani, tell us about us! Are we Chinese? Anglophile? Or pure Anglo? How are about you? English? American? Thambi?

Hey, Anglophile Thambi, Get the fuck out of my Motherland. Can’t you get a job in America? A real job, like washing dishes. Or maybe become a tailor. Only stupid Hong Kong TV gets conned by you.


Racism of the Anti-Racist: From Whiteness flows racism

Note the part in which Nathan Rich talks of moral superiority, the White feeling superior. Question: In feeling superior, Whiteness invades and plunder. What will Anglophile Whiteness do to Hong Kong?

For the answer look towards the American Mike Pompeo then at Claudia Bowring, born Chinese, born again White, railing against the Chinese.

Image result for Claudia Bowring


The Soul of the Anglophiles

From Black and Yellow to Whiteness. What comes next?

One answer to the title-question is found in folk songs. You know a folk song from its lyrical themes. Those themes existential in quality, the attachment between a homeland and the singer, or between country and singer, between its physical environment and the family or a girlfriend or boyfriend. In most folk songs, it speaks to an intense, inexplicable longing that goes with not being there in that home, village or country. (See next segment in this post.)

White Anglo-Americans, whether in the US or Australia, have no homeland. No homeland, therefore, no folk songs. the Dixieland stuff that Yankees croon about is not folk; it is cowboy stuff shooting up helpless Indians.

There is no American homeland because that property belong, you see, to somebody else. It seized from them at gunpoint and under the bayonets of Anglo-Saxons.

Anybody can emigrate to America or Canada because it never belonged to Americans. But white is preferred entry, especially if Anglo-Saxon. This ease of white entry into, say, Canada, getting a passport and then become Canadian, cultivates the illusion that the American continent is ‘Land of the Free’ even though its original, native population was subjugated and herded into ‘Reserves’ as if they are not human but a specie in danger of extinction. Throw in ‘democracy’ and ‘free market’ into this white admixture adds to the illusion that white people are from the beginning a benign force for good that the rest of the world should emulate.

The point is the above? It is this: A homeland has an ancestral past, that is, it is land bequeath by the ancestors. My Chinese ancestors left me with a country call China. From where did Justin Trudeau get his Canada. The natives wrote to his grandparents and say, please come and take this land?

That is a homeland is a thing bequeath to the present generation so that it may be passed on to the next. Taken away from you, the notion of homeland disappears. Freedom ceases. Which is also to say that true freedom can only come from, and is derived out of, living within people’s natural, birth environment. If that is taken away, what’s the freedom if not an abstraction — words made out of propaganda?

Even the Anglo-Americans occupiers of the Americas are not free; they have inherited blood-soaked land. Today’s generation are the descendants of warring, barbaric Europeans who had come in from another, distant place, oceans away. Their present wealth was borne out of killing natives.

While anybody, but preferably white, can become, say, an Australian, no white Anglo-American can become a Chinese. They can try to pick up a Chinese green card, get rich, marry even a Chinese but China can never, never be their homeland.

Unlike an Aussie, a Chinese is not identified by a passport nor by skin color through which white Europeans created apartheid in South Africa. Formally, we are identified by an ancient, 1,000-year-old family registration system that is more important than an identity card. This is called hukou 户口, a record handbook carried by individual families, with a copy in the national registry. It records who is married to married who, when, where, children names, who they had in turn married, names, when, where and so on in chronological order going from the present to the past. Literally translated hukou means ‘Family Entrance’.

I first saw Jian’s hukou, the size and thickness of a paperback, and I was shocked at what I found. In there is a record of 43 generations counting from her grandfather backwards. A mental calculation tells me that the land occupied by her family currently is historically traceable in writing, officially verified and stamped, going back more than 1,000 years.

That’s a Chinese family in her Chinese homeland that no white man can ever, ever erase. White people can kill all the natives of Australia and America, those places will never be their homeland, not even in another thousand years.

I am told that the Russians have a similar family identification system but this is not so detailed nor as ancient as the Chinese version.

All the above return us to the conclusion in the fundamental issue of identity implicit in the beginning of this post. It is, back-to-back, two-fold: What’s personal identity and what’s freedom. The two are inexplicably bound. This is also to say that one is true if only the other is true. Identity grants freedom and, inversely, there is no true freedom once identity is taken away.

In Hong Kong, Anglo Christiandom did not arrive to construct a civilization, it appropriated one.

The natives of Australia, the Americas and New Zealand: They will never be free now. The identity given them today called ‘American’ is not even theirs. It’s a name passed on to them from white, foreign occupiers. It was thrust on them so that, if anything, the word American means not Land of the Free. It means instead subjugation, death and slavery. (We Chinese are taught by the ancients, get your words and terms right so that their meanings can be truthful.)

Are white Americans free? Of course not. They may be free to own slaves, get rich from slavery but there would be no America, therefore no Americans, if their forebears weren’t genocidal murderers, crossing from Africa to America with black slaves stuffed into the hulls. America couldn’t have existed if there were no natives to first kill then rounded up into camps. There can be no masters without slaves. How then could masters be free if for them to exist, for them to be American, they had to lived off the blood and bones of the native dead. The German philosopher Nietzsche clearly saw this master-slave morality found everywhere in European culture.

In US foreign policy, this phenomenon continues — going into one land, destroy it, kill the inhabitants, take the wealth then move on to the next and on and on, a genocide that has gone on since the Europeans learned how to sailed into the oceans.

Here is Tocqueville talking about the forcible removal of the Chowtaw Indians from their homeland:

In this great throng no sobs or cries were heard; they were silent. Their misfortunes were long-standing, and they felt them to be irremediable. All of the Indians were already in the vessel that was going to carry them, but the dogs still remained on the bank. When the creatures understood at last that they were going to be left behind forever, they burst all together into a terrible howl, and plunging into the icy Mississippi, they swam after their masters.

What are Anglophiles if not Anglo-Americans in yellow and brown skin. They remind of the comical black men in three-piece suits and English bowler hats. Raised in the same diet of Judeo-Christian morality, replicating the world’s first thought crimes (coveting) from the bible, raised in the same school, taught the same subjects, praying even to the same god, the Chinese or Indian or black can’t be anything but Anglo-Americans. Kazuo Ishiguro is classic in this total conversion from Japanese to Anglophile once he is removed from his homeland.

Now, if Anglophile were to give themselves, lock, stock, barrel and soul over to such a foreign morality why wouldn’t they sell their mothers when push comes to shove? Why wouldn’t they sell Hong Kong to Anglo-Americans?

Anglophiles from Taiwan and Hong Kong to Malaysia and Singapore are a dime-a-dozen. When Anglophile reporters for the Financial Times or Straits Times question if Hong Kong people are Chinese, they never, never, never take up the inevitable answer: If not Chinese then they must be themselves the same as their subject of scrutiny — Anglophile. When the white woman Rachel Blundy of SCMP (below), say Hong Kong is in the throes of an ‘identity crisis’, she never, never, never say, whose identity is in question: Anglo Christian or Chinese Christian because the man and his daughter selling Chinese traditional medicine down the street seem very certain about theirs?

Below is VS Naipaul writing about the colonized mind in The Middle Passage [wherein the word West Indian is substituted for Hong Kong] and his idea remains valid

Living in a borrowed culture, [Hong Kong], more than most, needs writers to tell him who he is and where he stands. Here the [Hong Kong] writers have failed. Most have so far only reflected and flattered the prejudices of their [religious] groups. Many a writer has displayed a concern, visible perhaps only to [Hong Kong], to show how removed his group is from yellowness, how close to whiteness….

Of course, Anglo-Americans dismisses this total, complete conversion as a matter of religious freedom, like the freedom to convert entire indigenous nations in Australia and Canada. How close is Hong Kong (plus the Ambigas and Hannahs of Malaysia) to whiteness is also how close the colonized mind is to surrender, not just themselves, but the homeland to Anglo-American butchers

Kiron Skinner, appointed by Mike Pompeo into the White House, is a case in point. Herself a black, she said the US fight with the former Soviet Union was…

…a fight within the Western family. (But) this the first time that we will have a great power competitor that is not Caucasian.

Clearly there is something in Skinner’s racism that one least expects from a black woman. And it is this: After whiteness comes racism. The mind colonized — the ‘closeness to whiteness’ — it required no persuasion from Mike Pompeo, the US State Secretary meeting local politicians, along with Taiwanese in Washington, that the extradition Bill amendment offered the chance to turn Hong Kong upside into hell. Next things quickly followed, tactics and strategies lifted straight out of the Ukraine regime change playbook: money handed over, Claudia Bowring and Alan Leong gave general directions, the political base was marshaled, supplies of face masks, goggles, umbrellas, food were ordered.

Thus rallies came to pass under the umbrella of a single anti-China theme, drilled into mind, and all knew that in a rally attacking the police would surely bring on injuries and so rile up the population. They have no doubts as to how the western media would paint the government, China by extension. Claudia and her husband Philip Bowring had been reporters before. Others: Brian Wong, Linette Lim, Michael Chugani (top of post), Sumisha Naidu, Joyce Lim, Josh Hong, and, of course, Joseph I’m Not a Chinese Lim.

Like Skinner, the born-again Christian Claudia would infused Whiteness in the rallies as a battle between the Christian good against the Evil Chinese.

Whiteness in the colonized mind made sure the Whiteness of democracy and freedom were righteous forces against Chinese brutality. Western media, doing its part, would refuse to see, much less acknowledge, that in the 82 rallies against the HK government between January 2018 and May 2019, there was not one single case of police ‘brutality’. Not one, so why would the police do in on Jun 12 if they were not attacked with bricks and metal pipes.

Outside, in Malaysia for example, Whiteness, as it is found in Suaram and Bersih dutifully issued media statements condemning the ‘brutality’ and demand for the extradition bill scrapped. They, too, required no persuasion. On the one hand, their Whiteness were ready-made, like the politicians and rallies in Hong Kong. On the other, their Whiteness had been fed to them and financed by America’s National Endowment for Democracy. (See chart below.)

The colonized mind becomes into the colonizer. Brown, black, yellow all become white.

[Endnote: Is China weakened as a result? One reader, responding to earlier posts, wrote back to say ‘China’s international reputation had been badly “stained” by the Bill’. In those ten words, there are four factual errors. Like Carrie Lam’s Press conference yesterday, it was pointless making explanations or ‘communicating’. Listen to the questions (clip here, time marker 18:45 onwards) thrown at her because it’s plain in Whiteness and in the Whiteness of the Media: Only rioters are good and the media is here to spread the message of their goodness and stand up for them. The Chinese, however, are evil. Not one question, not one, deals with the hidden hand behind the riots; not one deals with the requisite independence of a government to make its own law. More important is this: A Chinese territory has lost to Whiteness its sovereignty to determine its own form of governance.]


Racism of the Anti-Racist

The Whiteness behind the Whiteness of propaganda: Rioters are good and peaceful, Chinese are evil and brutal.


Rachel Blundy

Look at that bitch face: You got an opinion, Rachel? Is it profound? Don’t tell us, we have our own. Now, go and fart it out in your toilet.


Kiron Skinner, above. in May, railing against China as the post-modernist national security threat to America that’s ‘not Caucasian’. Wonder why she just comes right off to say: America, the first Caucasian, Christian, Righteous power in in danger of being defeated.

See the pattern following Whiteness: America First, Britain First, Hong Kong First, Malaysian First….

Imagine the knock-on consequences of losing Whiteness: Restoring homelands to natives in America, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, all the Pacific islands from Hawaii to Guam and Samoa. Can you see why Whiteness consider China more dangerous than Russia; why White establishment is so freaked out by that prospect. It is just about global power competition because the consequences are worse than been defeated in battle by a yellow horde.


Structure of Whiteness in Control


Replace Malaysiakini with Hong Kong Free Press, replace all the names on the right side with Hong Kong names, you have the perfect replicate of Whiteness in city after city, spread all over the Anglophile world.


Chinese, Russian Folk Songs Compared

Can you see the common themes in both?


Play, play my accordion. Tell me about the black-eyed girl who drives me crazy…

Do you not croak, black crow?

Continue Reading »


Rescuing Hong Kong from Uncle Sam & Civic Party

Image result for hong kong extradition protests violence

June 12 afternoon: The policeman was struck in the head with a brick pilfered from a sidewalk pavement. All morning, an entire stretch of street had been dug out, its bricks collected into piles then used to rain down on police cordons outside LegCo building by masked men, an attack that came almost immediately after a speech to them nearby by Claudia Bowring (of Kowloon West geographic constituency, picture below).

Proposal Paper: Fighting Back




Image result for hong kong extradition protests violence

June 10 early morning: The policeman on the ground was dragged out of a cordon into the street by masked political radicals, surrounded and beaten half dead until he was spotted by a fellow officer who came to his rescue.



  • Mass movement, mass gathering, minimum 5,000 each.
  • Sequenced rallies, protests, same locations:
    1. US Consulate Garden Road, Central
    2. UK Consulate-General Hong Kong, Admiralty
    3. Statue Square, Central
    4. Sea View Estate, 4-6 Watson Road, North Point
    5. Marina Square East Centre, South Horizons, Ap Lei Chau



  • Running Dogs, Leave Hong Kong
  • Save Hong Kong
  • Stop Claudia Racism
  • Stop Alan Racism
  • Stop Anti-Chinese Racism
  • Protect Hong Kong from Traitors
  • Stop Re-Colonialism
  • Rule of Law — Hong Kong Law
  • Hong Kong Law, not UK Law
  • Hong Kong Law, not US Law
  • Buy British Last
  • Boycott Uncle Sam
  • Uncle Sam’s Invisible Hand: Chop It Off!
  • Dump the Dollar! De-peg!



JUNE, Third Week

  • Proceed with Extradition Bill.
  • Open airing, broadcast; simultaneous transmission.
  • When LegCo bldg is occupied:
    • Session adjourns to one of three locations (hotel, civic hall, park)
    • Session resumes on fixed dates
    • Call for People’s Protection of HK Law & LegCo; no police

The Dogs below…

Image result for alan leong traitor'

Alan Leong of the Civic Party at the Heritage, a US racist organization they call a ‘think tank’ which has vowed to destroy China for the reason, it says, is the world’s only ‘non-Caucasian’ (not white) threat to American power. Leong would be paid heavily to speak in front of Heritage.

American  coup d’etat and regime change instigations (Ukraine, Venezuela, Iran… ) always, without exception, begin with money, buying off local politicians such as by paying them handsomely to speak. In Leong’s case, the speech would be anti-China rhetoric.

Such a method of corruption is recorded in US public financial accounts as ‘speaking fees’.


JUNE, Fourth Week

  • Presentation of Approved Bill to US, UK, China
  • Further rallies outside US, UK consulates
  • Rally against Alan Leong (image above)
  • Rally against Claudia Mo Bowring (image below)

Pro-democracy lawmaker Claudia Mo holds a letter to US president Barack Obama, beside a combination photo featuring Obama and Edward Snowden, at a news conference in Hong Kong yesterday in support of Snowden. Photograph: Bobby Yip/Reuters

2013: Claudia Bowring (right), ex-Civic, now Hong Kong First. In the above press conference, Bowring was defending US spy Edward Snowden who defected to Russia after collecting intelligence on Hong Kong and China for four years until 2013 May. Just before his defection in June that year, Snowden was for about two weeks hiding in Central and so Bowring said after that it was legitimate for Snowden to spy on Hong Kong.

Claudia’s surname is Bowring because she, an ex-reporter herself, is married to Philip Bowring, a UK national and white supremacist who, in his entire media life, wrote anti-China articles for the now defunct Far Eastern Economic Review. Don’t call me Mo, her maiden family name, she would tell friends: “I’m Claudia!

An Anglophile who fancy herself more Christian than Jesus, more Shakespeare that the Bowrings, soul and skin whiter than Snow White, Claudia made money writing advertisement for French wines, got nowhere and decided politics would grant her the immortality of Jesuits once peddling opium in colonial Hong Kong.

Both husband and wife skilled themselves in US-style media propaganda that is the requisite, the first thing to do, when America wants to institute regime change anywhere in the world. This propaganda is currently most intense against, notably, China, Venezuela, Russia and Iran. Hong Kong is underway but directed at China instead.



  • Rally against Lee Cheuk-yan
  • Rally: US Consulate, Return USA to Natives!
  • Rally: US Consulate, Stop Genocide!
  • Rally: US Consulate, No Extradition to Racist USA

JULY, Second Week

  • Rally: US Consulate, We are not your Suzie Wongs!
  • Rally: US Out of Hong Kong!
  • Rally: UK Out of Hong Kong!

Image result for suzie wongs us sailor



Image result for bill kristol regime change china




To understand what’s happening to Hong Kong today, look back to late 2013 and early 2014 but not Hong Kong. Ukraine. Spread over four months, with US-directed propaganda and financing, further backed by UK/German sanctions, ‘democratic’ rallies, ‘peaceful’ gatherings, riot techniques, burning public property, occupation of government facilities, all took place in weekly sequence in Kiev, the capital.

The most intense, violent period lasted 5 days until Feb 23 when the Slavic or ethnic Russian government was replaced by a US-backed fascist president. Within a year of the coup d’etat, American troops, missiles and fighter jets, all directed at Russia, the ultimate target in the coup, moved into Ukraine.

There has been no peace in Ukraine since, with ethnic cleansing of Russian Slavs, civil war, entire villages burned and looted, many emigrating to next door Russia. Such a consequence would be the equivalent of Hong Kongers fleeing to Shenzhen once the US and UK succeed in taking over Hong Kong, possible if the Civic Party (of Alan Leong) and Hong Kong First (of Claudia Bowring) provide the on-the-ground storm troopers. Rallies are merely the swamps from which crocodiles come out to attack.

As in Ukraine, the aim of the American coup would be to install a Hong Konger completely loyal to it. Perhaps Alan Leong or Claudia Bowring. Failing which Americans hope to at least weaken the government so badly it would bring back voter support for Leong’s Civic party which lost half its seats in elections late last year. This means they live on to fight another day and launch another coup.

America (and the UK) has never been shy to admit that its ultimate political goal is dismembering China: Taiwan half successful, still trying with Xinjiang and Tibet, and today Hong Kong for the second time.

Whichever way one looks at it, America has nothing to lose (other than a couple of million dollars) from the rioting and breakup of Hong Kong from the Motherland. The same strategy is underway in Taiwan. The demonstrations on June 9, the June 12 riots inside and outside LegCo, and in more to come, America is telling Carrie Lam, the HK government, China and the world this: Either jail Leong, Claudia, et al, or Hong Kong will still be ours. They have openly made known their coup intention (see Nov 2018 tweet by Bill Kristol above), while the US Congress in Nancy Pelosi has reaffirmed the same, Give us Hong Kong or we’ll kill it. (For instance, see image at bottom of post.) Says Pelosi:

The extradition bill imperils the strong U.S.-Hong Kong relationship that has flourished for two decades. If it passes, the Congress has no choice but to reassess whether Hong Kong is ‘sufficiently autonomous’ under the ‘one country, two systems’ framework.

For more on those attempts by the US and UK to tear Hong Kong out of China, see this: Anglo US Coup in HK. The same efforts and strategy were employed to separate Ukraine from Russia (of Ukrainian population, half is Slavic Russian living mostly in the east and south.) The clip below tells you that what’s happening to Hong Kong is no spontaneous event but that the two, Ukraine 2014, now HK 2019, are identical in regime change tactics. The HK rallies and the brick and metal pipe attacks on LegCo have a target and a back-end purpose and neither is about Extradition.




According to the honchos of Socialist Party of Malaysia, Hong Kong protestors are

“Unarmed … and peaceful…”

Hey, Nasir, Arul, Why don’t each of you go fuck your mothers and, after you have washed your pricks, come back and tell us if your mama felt peaceful. These Malaiyoo thambis….

No, we won’t extradite them to China, we will send them to ArulSemenyih, FOC.



The time has come: For peace tomorrow, we must begin today to destroy the USA. Totally destroy it, one strike at time, brick by brick, chip, chip, chip, strike by strike, moment on moment, day by day, year after year until their blood cry out, by which time, they won’t plea to be released from their sufferings but simply say, be merciful, kill us, please. But we won’t.


One of the difficulties with this site is that it is up against an inundation of western propaganda so saturated by it that the Internet is worthless.

This post is about a two-prong strategy to undermine then cripple China by the US — “that country of lynchers,” Frantz Fanon calls it. Before that though, here is something you need to be aware of: Because your daily diet of information (news, Twitter, etc.) is monopolized and supplied only by the western media and Anglophile underlings, things are never what they seem. Below, the clip serves as primer and partial background to this post, exposing the sheer saturation of western propaganda flooding the world… and they get away with it.


Hong Kong on Fire


Above, how the US set Ukraine on fire, 2014, thrown into motion by fascist Ukrainian politicians along with CIA members in the US embassy. (YouTube version.)

Below, the same tactics is repeated in Hong Kong. 2019 June 9 and June 12. Even by their own admission, the Hong Kong provocateurs surrounding the Legislative Council building say those steps are only the beginning: (a) seize the downtown Central district, and (b) seize public buildings and “paralyze” the government. This modus operandi have the same Ukrainian aims: destabilization, revolt, provoke mainland PLA intervention, more propaganda, then US sanctions, open and public US backing for the insurrection in the name of ‘freedom’ and ‘democracy’ leading to the eventual installation of a pro-US, fascist regime in HK, the same as Taiwan under Tsai Ing-wen’s DPP.


Image result for bill kristol regime change china

Above, Bill Kristol, in November 2018, chief US propagandist and inner circle member of the US Deep State

US-financed protestors, paid with hard hats, goggles, masks and daily meal allowances, storm the HK legislature building armed with steel pipes and bricks. Below, a 5-second clip and note the UK flag.

Below, one of the dozens of British BBC propaganda videos circulated leading up to the June 2019 riots. The BBC relied entirely on Anglo-American, the West ‘must protect HK‘ talking points — freedom, democracy, rights, rule of law — that ultimately were used to justify, bomb and blow up entire countries then remove governments in Ukraine, Kosovo, Iraq, Libya, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Afghanistan, Syria. It left in its aftermath human misery in unprecedented scale, terrorism followed and are still continuing….

Hong Kong looks like the second test case into whether Anglo-America regime change tactics will succeed in the Far East. The first was Malaysia, but Barisan surrendered without resisting although Harapan had less than half the popular vote, making it an illegitimate minority government.



Related image

The name of the Anglophile above is Alice Lai — Alice as in ‘Alice in Wonderland’.

Married to a white Scot, she has a British National Overseas (BNO) passport, won’t stay in London, won’t ‘keluar’, makes money peddling advertisements to Chinese, travel back and forth to Guangdong, fond of cheap Shenzhen goods, and so her answer to her existential dilemma is bring more Brits into HK, to recolonize it.

Imagine if, on the other hand, HK was ruled by black South Africans, might she be so enthusiastic about throwing opening her arms, mouth and cunt to a white prick? Anglophile reporters in Singapore and Malaysia call their angst an expression of ‘identity crisis’. Do Anglophiles know when is an identity in crisis? Or even what’s an identity?

In this part of post-colonial Asia, stupid Anglophiles are a dime a dozen. So… they make useful idiots when Anglo America wants to undermine China.

Under the revised law, HK is the safest place for Julian Assange

Some placards on the June 9 HK march read:

  • No Extradition to China!
  • Chinese Colonialists: Get Out of HK.

You get the drift…? If you don’t, here it is: Malaiyoos march in Kg Baru chanting, ‘Umno Colonialists: Get Out of Tanah Melayu‘. Are they stupid? Or, you see the Anglo-American hand in the demonstrations?

But you don’t argue with voodoo or the merits of changing the Extradition Law. Doing so, you might as well argue with Hannah Yeoh about the empirical truth of God’s existence.

Fascist colonialism has returned: white people are not shy about it and they are Anglophile Chinese who want to carry their flags. We call them the Wu Sangui 吳三桂 and Chinese history is replete with such characters. (See the Carrie Lam segment near the end of post.)

Anglo-Americans actually believe that HK is white man’s property. So rule of law must fit their political agenda, their colonial mentality and racial prejudices. Otherwise, the extradition amendments, because it least affects Chinese, but will most affect Anglo-Americans living especially in Hong Kong plotting against China (people like Tim Hamlett for example). On the other hand, the revised law would offer safe haven for Anglo-Americans escaping US extra-territorial brutality. The former CIA whistleblower Edward Snowden was in HK, now under asylum in Russia. Under the law, the US can’t touch him. Likewise Julian Assange. Likewise Chelsea Manning…

Our forefathers taught us: Seek truth from facts. But, if there are no truths to be had, no truth from facts, What should China do against people demanding the return of white colonialism? What should we Chinese do?

I think I know.

Because if HK is British, below, then extradition makes HK very, very anti-British? So the next BBC reporter or Guardian, even Steven Gan or Rais Hussin, distributing lies from HK won’t be safe?

Extradition to China? Of course, not. Why would we Chinese do that?

We feed you to the sharks around HK. There is even one location that’s very British, called Repulse Bay. Your prick, your cunt, tits, arms and legs stay within HK territorial waters. Happy?

Main post follows…


Part A: Subversion from within

Why did Anglo-US March in HK?


Pressure point: US applies regime change via Taiwan, HK

Although the bill before Hong Kong’s Legislative Council is often touted as the China Extradition law, the word China or Mainland or Motherland is never mentioned in it, not once. What is stated are

  • (a) the conditions for extradition of persons or groups of persons,
  • (b) the removal of bilateral treaties as a sufficient and necessary requisite to kick start an extradition process, and,
  • (c) the judicial oversight into the crimes facing a person when an extradition request is made.

Anglo-American countries tout themselves as governed by rule of law. But this HK bill is rule of law so, as people say, ‘what’s the problem?’ It sets the rules into who and under what circumstances can a person be extradited. Why then is the US badmouthing badmouthing the rule of law? And then to pay off HK opposition politicians to stage rallies against it?

Extradition is a diplomatic and a foreign policy matter, the sole jurisdiction of the central government in Beijing. Hong Kong is a part of China and therefore has no right to dictate, whether going by the Basic Law or by international, UN norms. As of right and sovereignty, HK shouldn’t even have an extradition law. Its present situation is like as if Hawaii or New Mexico or Alaska had told the US Congress that each of them can decide who to extradite. Bad enough there is such a law but the fact of amending it only reaffirms a two country, two systems rule. Typical though of ancient Chinese state attitudes towards the ruled, Beijing would again and again bend backwards in order to appease mind-washed Anglophiles, in particular the ruling political and business class.

In usual past circumstances, extraditions were intended to reflect the seriousness and capital nature of crimes committed in Country X and the suspect absconding to Country Y. But the past decades, extraditions are used for all sort of things, especially political ones. Julian Assange’s case is classic: an Australia (Country A), hiding in Ecuador (Country B), arrested in the UK (Country C), for deportation to the US (Country D). Meng Wanzhou is another, and her’s is for the supposed crime of selling Huawei handphones to Iran (Country E) so that not only is there no victim because the sanction law of the US is made to applied to a Chinese national for committing the offense against Iran which ordered the cellphones.

Under HK existing extradition law, Meng would be an open and shut case, regardless of its absurdity and the US political and military motives to destroy Iran. So open-ended is it that whatever the US wanted, HK had to deliver. Anglo-America exploited this loophole (as in the case of Assange and Meng) so that extradition is kicked off based no longer on a supposed crime but the severity of punishment or likely punishment.

Under the HK amendments, vigorous conditions were thus introduced, with two layers of oversight, one by the government and the other by the judiciary.

But the existence of the law then amending it were, in combination, an error. Opposition politicians, egged on by the UK and the US turned extradition from a sovereign matter into a domestic political boxing match as if whether or not to extradite a fugitive has to be decided by democracy. Name one country in the world, democratic or whatever, where extradition requires a vote? None!

This is like asking Australians to decide on foreign nationals, such as the confessed murderer Sirul Azhar Umar, if he has the democratic and human right to be kept in Australia all because he faces death in Malaysia. Opposition to the HK amendment amounts to that. So absurd is this raft of Anglo-Saxon rule of law that while Sirul has his human rights, Altantuyaa Shaariibuu has none. Worse, it made Australian law (no extradition) superior to Malaysian law (death for murder), a supremacist position that in effect gives extraterritorial reach of Anglo-American power. It also meant that an Australian could kill anyone in Malaysia, run back to Australia, and there’s nothing in the world Malaysia can do about it.

HK law as it stands, previously lifted straight from the UK and Canada, is so loose that it is an ass. Without changing the terms of extradition treaties (HK has 20 with other countries) revision was therefore the only solution and which had nothing to do with 99.99999 percent of the population unless you are a out-and-out criminal. But this is what Nancy Pelosi said in a statement, the day after Jun 9:

The China-controlled Legislative Council’s proposed extradition bill chillingly showcases Beijing’s brazen willingness to trample over the law to silence dissent and stifle the freedoms of the people of Hong Kong (sic!) … The extradition bill imperils the strong U.S.-Hong Kong relationship that has flourished for two decades. If it passes, the Congress has no choice but to reassess whether Hong Kong is ‘sufficiently autonomous’ under the ‘one country, two systems’ framework.

Thus the penultimate US twist to the situation is this: HK cannot change its own laws unless the US government agrees. Or else…. Through its HK surrogates, a thousand people were paid to amass with gas masks, goggles, bricks in hand and stacked up (above) in front of the Legco parliament so as to prevent legislators from coming in to deliberate on the Bill.


Can you see the twisting by that American democratic bitch: “freedom, peace, rights…” — the same BBC propaganda talking points in the clip near the top.

Horrific? Peaceful? For peace, the protestors collected bricks from sidewalks. Within an hour they had stacked it up along the entire street ready for use to attack the Legislative Council building and policemen. More than 30 were struck and injured in the late afternoon of June 12 but can’t be taken to hospitals because other rioters had blocked all the exit roads — all of them — refusing even ambulances to enter or leave. Tear gas had to be used to clear the roads. (Refer to clips near top of this post.)

Photo: Sam Tsang

Meng Wanzhou, Snowden and the HK Extradition Law

Now return to Dec 1 when Meng Wanzhou was picked up in Vancouver on a stopover Cathay Pacific flight from Hong Kong.

  • Question: Did the US demand for Meng while she was in HK? Answer: Yes.
  • Must HK hand her over: Yes, but it didn’t, using some excuses.
  • Under the revised HK law, can the US demand for Meng from HK again: Yes.
  • Must HK hand her over: No, and HK won’t need excuses for that. The US must convincingly establish its case both before the Chief Executive and local judges. It will not always get what it want simply because it said so.

Hence, you can see why the US is instigating riots against the HK legislators from passing the law. Once adopted, HK would be safe from countless US extra-territorial sanctions (Iran, Russia, Venezuela, etc) it has imposed worldwide, for both property and persons. Those sanctions would be toothless, and rightfully so.

But, there is an additional twist to the HK law revision: Cathay Pacific, because it tipped off the FBI which in turned alerted Canada into Meng’s flight itinerary, would be guilty of usurping the law. It would be abetting a foreign government in overriding the legal authority of Hong Kong (and China).

This is what Nancy Pelosi meant in saying that 85,000 Americans in HK would at be ‘risk’ from the law. That is, the law says to American PR hacks, school teachers and businessmen who want to spy on behalf of the CIA or FBI, to go elsewhere. HK is not your playground.

In a nutshell, then, the law revision has a two-fold effect as follows:

  • (a) protect persons like Meng from arbitrary arrests, and from Anglo-American extra-territorial reach as if what America wants America will get, and,
  • (b) remove all ambiguities into what crimes committed elsewhere are applicable for extradition. Even after omitting a slew of commercial crimes the amendments printed on paper is even thicker than the existing law. This specificity is for a good reason: selling to Iran by Americans may be illegal but why should an Eskimo be held accountable to American law for selling furs to the Iranian rich?

The sinister American hand in intervening in the HK’s legislative process has its genesis five years earlier than Meng. It has to do with Edward Snowden, the former CIA and National Security Agency whistleblower.

On May 20, 2013, Snowden flew from Hawaii to Hong Kong where for two weeks in a hotel room in Central he made contact with the global media then handed out classified documents to reporters of the Guardian, the Washington Post and Der Spiegel. The minute he left the NSA Hawaii office, Snowden knew he was running against the clock because secret service agents would be going after him.

Claiming extradition rights, the US demanded for Snowden’s head, a demand that arrived on the day he left the airport for Russia where asylum was promised. (He did tried asking two or three other countries, including Venezuela but not China, and eventually picked Russia.)

Snowden had by then been in HK for two weeks, so it is entirely possible he was tipped off and so bought a plane ticket out the same day the US demand note arrived.

  • Under the HK revised law, would Snowden be arrested by local police and deported to the US?
  • Answer: Unlikely because the US must first charge before asking for his head.

At the time, there was just the US demand and Snowden wasn’t indicted until June 21, 2013, by which time he was safely ensconced in Russia.

Why did US turn a HK Law into a hate-China campaign

That the US and HK opposition parties made the amendments look like a case against China is a matter of its propaganda efficacy, driven on two fronts: local politics and the Anglophile media.

(We Chinese are hopeless at propaganda, much less to recognize one. Blame this on our forefathers, preaching sincerity instead. With sincerity they had never, never, never thought that deception and lying would be necessary in state administration. Besides, they had never come across such white man culture.)

Politically, the HK’s Democrat parties have the financial and ideological support of Taiwan’s DPP. Both sides have seen their political fortunes dropping, the DPP losing municipal elections. In HK many UK-funded politicians have lost electoral ground in district elections late last year, some were successful prosecuted and jailed for rioting and for individual attacks made against the police. This time, though, they see the extradition law revision as providing a chance to recover lost ground and they would leap on the opportunity. There is, in it, America-backing after all, never mind if they must twist the issue, never mind that the HK family of the girl killed by her boyfriend in Taiwan would never get justice and closure.

Thus: A single issue, linked back to one fall guy, called China, is intended to speak to their base, recoup electoral support and the continued financial backing of Anglo-America.

The Anglo-American hand in the anti-China march is best expressed through the website called Hong Kong Free Press, HKFP (here, where it issued calls to protestors to “paralyze” the government).  The HKFP have long been noted as a front for the Anglo-American intelligence services run by former British journalist and anti-China crusader Tim Hamlett.

In many ways Hamlett is identical to the former Trump advisor Steve Bannon (image below) who ran Brietbart news website. With a ready English-speaking audience in America, Australia and Canada, both saw there is money to be made in being globalist anti-China and racist. (See for example this anti-Chinese racist diatribe from Alex Ward at Vox.) This is not unlike the tactics used by Mahathir Mohamad, Umno and Pakatan Harapan, exploiting the issue of one community trampling over another. Additionally, the PKR, other elements in Harapan, namely Rais Hussin and Wan Sulaiman, are members of the Liberal International, the same London-based group to which belong Tsai Ing-wen’s DPP, the UK Liberal party, and HK’s Civic and Democratic parties that have organized the protests and send in its most radical members as cheer leaders and violent instigators.

Like George Soros who funded Harapan elements and the US National Endowment for Democracy which paid Malaysiakini and paid Ukranian fascists, Liberal International goal also calls for regime change. Although this change is far more difficult with China than, say, Ukraine or Libya, the same tried and tested tactics are employed and funded: starting with a blitz of western media propaganda, followed by more instigation, provocateurs, mass street rallies, violent rioting when necessary, all aimed, first, at destabilization then installing a new pro-Western government.

They believe that China’s weakest pressure points, politically, are in three areas where there have the biggest chance of success: Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Xinjiang. Hence, one sees, an inflammatory blitz of provocateur statements coming from the White House and US Congress the last two months. Almost weekly China’s foreign ministry have to offer rebuttals, usually muted because it’s been so routine as to be banal. (See this latest, for example, by China’s foreign ministry condemnation of Pompeo’s inflammatory remarks over Xinjiang.)


What is in it for HK Marchers?

Chinese fugitive tycoon Guo Wengui posted pictures at his New York home, where former White House strategist Steve Bannon visited him. Photo: Guo Wengui's Twitter @KwokMiles

A Man Named Guo, HK & US Regime Change


Although propaganda efficacy explains why Anglo-America has been so successful in deflecting the amendment towards cultivating a hatred for China, propaganda doesn’t explain what’s in it for the rioters should they succeed to stop the Bill. This question is posed because

  • (a) if China wants some HK asshole badly enough, it has demonstrated many times it is able to get that person, regardless of HK’s extradition law, revised or not revised, and
  • (b) unless murder is committed in mainland China, it pays no dividend for China, losing goodwill instead, if it were to have some kid extradited for standing on a pulpit shouting for HK independence; in numerous past instances, China simply pretend the kid is spitting in the wind because few listen anyway; where active politicians have mouthed such sentiments in public, China simply declare them persona non-grata and they soon shut up because they can’t visit their mistresses in Shenzhen.

The trigger for the amendments was a HK boy who while on Valentine Day holiday in Taiwan with her pregnant girlfriend strangled her to death in their hotel room, stuffed her body into a trolley case, dumped it nearby then flew back to HK. Taiwan police traced the murder to him, contacted HK which can’t do a thing to extradite him, nor did Taiwan want him — the dead is not a Taiwanese anyway. So he is still free today (see the Nathan Rich clip at top of this post).

This is to illustrate that in normal circumstances, extradition applies typically to serious, bodily or capital crimes committed in another country or legal jurisdiction. Almost all known extradition cases in HK (or elsewhere) apply to foreigners such as, say, Sirul and Zakir Naik. Even Jho Low would be extraditable given his money laundering charges in both America and Malaysia. Alongside the US and UK, Taiwan has admitted it won’t support the revised law, justifying the decision to say that since the law makes Taiwanese liable to deportation, it won’t won’t ask for the HK boy-murderer Chan Tong-kai.

(Simply restated, that is the exact same supremacist, extra-territorial attitude taken by white people in colonial days: No matter what, don’t touch our people. HK’s one country, two systems model has produced the absurd situation such as the KL police cannot have a murderer who fled to Sarawak because the latter is supposed to be autonomous though not independent.)

All this meant one thing: ordinary Hong Kong citizens have far, far, far, far, far less at stake in the amendments, individually and personally, than foreigners, Anglo-Americans especially because of the Cold War legacy that filled HK with people from PR hacks and English teachers to embassy officials all hired to spy on China. (This is what white people at the Foreign Correspondent Club mean when they use to say HK is a “window” to China as if this city is their grandfather’s pawnshop.) The law revision won’t even apply to HK’s anti-China political provocateurs who are persona non grata in China anyway and who, therefore, can’t cause mischief other than to smuggle themselves on some fishing junk to get drunk on Friday nights in some Foshan brothel. If none of these groups have anything to gain from opposing the amendment, Why then…? Why, unless there’s money to be made? A district Councillor, the lowliest of the low in HK political hierarchy, earns about HK$80,000 (US$10,250 or MYR42,600) a month, expenses for fishing trips to Foshan not yet counted. You want? Anybody want?

Another answer, but equal in material gain, is found in a person Guo Wengui 郭文贵 (image above beside Steve Bannon). He is a Chinese national, Shandong native, age about 50, reckoned to be one of the top 100 Chinese billionaires with money made from real estate 10, 12 years ago, particularly in Beijing, by colluding with corrupt officials such as Ma Jian (National Security bureau) and Zhang Yue (senior Hebei official).

In 2015 when Xi Jinping clamped down on corruption, it netted persons like Ma and Zhang whereas Guo fled, first to America, then Europe, then back and forth, before settling down in his US$82 million Manhattan apartment overlooking New York’s Central Park. Relying on his old association with ex-senior government officials, he denounced China to help feed the hate-China US campaign conducted through western media outlets like VOA, PBS, BBC, and through his Twitter and blog posts. He even once claimed that China’s military brought down flight MH370 from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing. Regardless of his claims, America, finding him useful, offered him asylum for (what else?) ‘political persecution’. After which Guo even offered money to any Chinese national for any leak of confidential China information; he set up, in true Anglo-American ideological fashion, the ‘Rule of Law Foundation‘, and peddled US political influence with US$100 million, part to Steve Bannon and part to the Hillary Clinton 2016 presidential campaign. He knew how to play both sides.

But, outside China, without a solid business base, plus emptied the connections to go with it, his empire began to unravel. Chinese investigations into his activities finally produced in 2017 a slew of charges in absentia: corruption, forgery, fraud, and even a rape charge by one of his former secretaries called ‘Assistant’.

China seized all his businesses in China except for one: that is, those domiciled in Hong Kong where court applications took a year to freeze assets in 2018 worth US$1.1 billion booked to HK-registered companies with names like ‘Eastern Profit’. Ring a bell with Jho Low?

Freezing his assets is one thing but it is another thing altogether to get him — a prize far more important than money because China doesn’t need his money. China has been in this situation before: Lai Changxing, for example. Wanted for smuggling gasoline oil and buying off Fujian officials, he shuffled between Hong Kong and Canada to evade arrests. It took China ten years of diplomatic negotiations and bargaining, relying on the work of 1,200 investigators before Lai was finally extradited from Canada in 2011 on the written promise he won’t be shot. In 2012 Lai was sentenced to life imprisonment, ending a 15-year-long saga and the careers of 300 provincial officials.

The problem as the Lai’s case illustrates is this: HK extradition law revision has more to do with mainland officials and businessmen than with HK individuals. For decades, crooks and thugs in Taiwan and HK typically hid in China on the assumption that, being big, it was easier to hide, they have connections, life is cheap and officials can be bought. Indeed each time HK asked, China would agree and has since reunification in 1997 traced and returned about 200 to HK. Even countries such as Bulgaria, Spain, and Canada have returned fugitives. In the opposite direction, not one in HK is returned to China — on account of rule of law. As people grew rich on the back of China’s growing economy, more and more crooks hide their persons, mistresses and money in HK where the severest punishment is life imprisonment, no bullet in the head. Macau is even better: 30 years max. Guo Wengui is yet another repeat of these globe-trotting Mainland crooks because they can afford it and HK rule of law, like it or not, have been abetting their evasion and lifestyle.

Into this mix, enter American hegemonic politics in which keeping company with tinpot dictators, corrupt Arab princes, and Chinese like Guo is more important than justice and morality. This explains why unlike Lai, Guo has been able to evade arrests and extradition from the US. Below is Frank Gaffney (pictured in 2013), founder of the far-right Center for Security Policy ‘think tank’, part financed by Guo, and which has the explicit aim to bring down China, particularly to undermine the government from within.

Crooks getting together is notorious in American political life.

On Guo’s side, corporate fraud at home (see third image below) as well as abroad and paying off US politicians have earned him law suits; a few of which almost landed him in court; and, Interpol issued a red notice for his capture. China’s security officials have even visited him in his Manhattan apartment. In one instance when the US Justice Department prepared a charge list, the US State Department intervened and the case against Guo was duly filed away, no doubt thanks to his influence peddling and persons like Frank Gaffney (immediately below).

Frank Gaffney (pictured in 2013) is the founder of the far-right Center for Security Policy think tank. Photo: AFP

A Twitter page of Chinese exiled businessman Guo Wengui is seen on a computer screen in Beijing. Photo: AP Photo

Cases filed against Guo Wengui in New York by Kevin Tung of law firm Kevin Kerveng Tung PC involve plaintiffs unable to recover assets awarded to them by a Beijing court. Photo: Robert Delaney

In more ways than one Guo is like Jho Low, except for these differences: Guo is a Chinese national, the US has made China, not Malaysia, a ‘national security threat’; he has the ears of Trump’s administration and friends, in particular among hawks like John Bolton, Mike Pompeo, vice-president Pence, all of who have made no bones of wanting China destroyed. If Joey is a China national, they too would have hid the 1MDB fiasco, file away the investigation papers, and no forfeiture suits.

All of which makes China even more determined and more resolved to get Guo, for the anti-China propaganda he has helped distribute among Americans and the crook that he is. Like Lai shuttling between Canada and HK, Guo has two legs spread across the Pacific where HK is key because of his business interests necessary to bring in money.

In America’s regime change agenda, it has ratcheted up the propaganda and instigated rebellion inside Taiwan, HK and Xinjiang. This raises a question: Other than Americans, who else among HK and Taiwan political turncoats are on Guo’s payroll either directly or in association with Americans like Frank Gaffney? This is asked because Guo was prompted to tweet the following (below) a few days before the Jun 9 march and Jun 12 riot (all of which coincided with a slew of anti-China propaganda articles in Malaysiakini):

[In translation] In the past few days, I have seen word from various (Soros-type hedge?) Funds in the US and Europe. Everyone sees the evil CCP. . . More and more organizations will act. . . There will be big moves in Hong Kong, Xinjiang and Taiwan . . . Everything is just starting. . .

This makes HK extradition law revision urgent. It will mean that Guo, either on his own or via American agents, they will have little maneuvering space under the revised law. Guo out of the way, one of HK’s key anti-China, pro-US, regime change instigators is effectively neutralized, and the HK opposition will have one big banker less, ideologically, politically and financially. They are good only as long as, so Americans call them, “Useful Idiots.”

But this effort at squeezing Guo is only part of the story. Bigger than him are Americans, any of who plotting regime change in HK is vulnerable, so you can see why America, from the White House to Nancy Pelosi, have demanded for the HK Bill to be defeated and scrapped — nothing less will do for them.


Part B: Subversion from without

US Shows its hand


U-Tun USA: Huawei is no longer spying?

Sino-Russian Alliance

US: Getting key Chinese persons wherever found

It is by now plainly clear that with Meng Wanzhou, tariffs, US national security, American jobs, Canadian rule of law, Anglo-American 5I, those merely represent the gathering clouds into a much larger and deeper US agenda, that is, regime change in China.

Like the weapons of mass destruction (WMD) propaganda faked against Iraq, America against China could also count on Reuters, Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, CNN, Malaysiakini

Trade war is today met with trade war; Huawei is met with Apple; tariffs is met tariffs; chips are met with rare earth that makes the former.

But something is not right with China’s response to this US-organised subversion (see clips above and immediately below) of its sovereignty. If trade is indeed merely a pretext, then the China response is against the pretext rather than meeting head-on the underlying causes driving this KKK-supremacist, regime change approach.

US regime change now rests on two planks, one ideological, the other racial. At the ideological level, it has been made repeatedly, by Pelosi for instance, as well as Pence and Pompeo. On the second, America will not, says a US official, tolerate a “non-Caucasian” power, no matter where in the world.

This racism is most sinister, for example, when the US set up only Chinese companies for destruction, ZTE before, now Huawei. The destruction, other than financial, is also personal and individual, Meng Wanzhou. After her, the US has singled out Chinese students to the US, withholding visas from them and seeking assistance of US universities to monitor, that is, spy on those already studying there.

With universities, Zhang Shoucheng enters the picture. A healthy man, still in his early fifties, Zhang is a quantum physics professor at Stanford. He died suddenly, without explanation on Dec 1, the day Meng Wanzhou was abducted in Canada. Ten days earlier, on Nov 20, 2018, the US government singled out Digital Horizon Capital (DHVC), among a Silicon Valley “web of entities” used, it alleges, “to further the industrial-policy goals of the Chinese government. That is it was accused of spying.

DHVC was set up by Zhang as a source of seeding further research into quantum computing that he believes is several thousand times more efficient than the existing transistor motherboard micro-chip used in phones and computers. At the time of the report, Zhang was in Hong Kong and Meng as well. Next day after their meeting in HK, she was abducted whereas Zhang was found dead near his home in San Mateo, California.

Arthur Herman, a senior fellow at the white racist supremacist think tank Hudson Institute, celebrated Zhang’s death in the Forbes magazine as a “warning” to China, adding:

“It’s time to take the necessary steps to make sure that we don’t lose our crown (tech) jewels (to China)….”

Below, we look at how a parallel sequence of events has reveal the steps taken by the US in its exterminate China campaign.



Exterminating China on the Outside

While Part A of this post explains the US efforts at undermining China from within, this segment looks at its effort coming from the outside in. It examines the question an American would: Where are China’s most vulnerable points and therefore easiest to kill: Huawei? Meng Wanzhou? Zhang Shoucheng? Chinese scientists in the US? Critical China’s suppliers like Iran, Venezuela and the like of ASML in the Netherlands? (ASML’s production facility was burned to the ground, also on Dec 1).

One way of ascertaining this US plot is to frame it as a question:

If the trade war, US individual attacks on Meng, Zhang, etc, are unrelated to domestic economics, trade and technology security, what are the likely results from the combination of those US actions?

Below are the actions in chronological order:

  • Feb 2019: US launched total sanctions against Iran, which alone supplies a third of oil and gas imports to China.
  • May 2019: US Defense Department issued a paper calling for a regional, NATO-like alliance against China. It named Singapore, Mongolia, Taiwan, Australia and New Zealand as key members, calling them “reliable, capable, and natural partners of the United States.”
  • Jun 2019: US signals it would abandon the One-China policy, in effect threatening to recognize Taiwan as an independent sovereign state and rather than as a sovereign part of China.
  • Jun 2019: At discounted rates and subsidized by it, the US unveils a package in US$49 billion worth of surveillance and attack drones to Southeast Asian countries. Among those receiving it is Malaysia and Vietnam.


Seemingly unrelated individual cases once framed within a wider context provides the answer to the question posed earlier:

  • (a) From without, economic, commercial and trade warfare, the US must have hoped, will weaken China internally, administratively and politically, thereby setting up the stage for…
  • (b) Subversion within, wherein events staged in Taiwan, Hong Kong and Xinjiang could logically shake the Chinese government at the core.

Why is the US doing all this? What did China steal from the US to deserve these provocations, actions and its evil?

There is no easy answer to those questions because this is like asking, Why does Mahathir Mohamad hate the Chinese so much?

One can only know US motives by the actions and their consequences. That motive, as found in the tongue of a White House official says, China is the first ‘non-Caucasian’ power to rival America on all fronts. Military power is the only exception. Militarily, it’s easy to turn to smithereens Iraq, Afghanistan, others but what is the US to do if it can’t and dare not deploy guns and bombs against China, a nuclear power at that?

The answer is self-evident. But China’s response, allying itself against Russia, is inadequate: methods to mitigate US subversion from the outside have to be different from the inside.


Admiral Phil Davidson addresses the symposium on June 4, with the flag of Taiwan’s Marines Corps in the background (right). Photo: US Marine Corps Forces, Pacific

Note on the extreme right, the Taiwan flag as US Admiral Phil Davidson speaks. This was a June 4 meeting of various ‘Indo-Pacific’ military chiefs in Hawaii. It was a clearest indication yet of the US provocation to instigate a military alliance against China and Taiwan would be a key component.



Carrie Lam’s Confession

Even her husband would betray her, accusing her of ‘selling out Hong Kong’.

Message to Mrs Lam


Dear Mrs Lam,

Talk, explain if you must. But it won’t work. The entire issue has been manipulated entirely out of shape on the altar of American hegemonic, racial politics. Look at it anyway you want, even after shutting your eyes to global trend, the Bill was never about democracy or freedom. It is a sovereignty issue, the only issue at stake.

If Hong Kong can’t carry through its own laws, then it will never be able in the future to do so: Hong Kong will have to bow and seek American approval. Even on a simple question of who is murderer and who is to be charged will be decided by America.

Carry the Bill to its conclusion. That is the right of the government, and the right of Hong Kong’s sovereignty, independence and freedom.

If protestors and rioters, these running dogs, stand in the way, put them down. Lock them up and throw away the keys. If they don’t like it, they should be welcome to leave Chinese property. They have their BNO passports. If not, London should be encouraged to issue it to them and take responsibility for instigating extra-territorial impunity.

We, the People of China, inheritors of our Motherland, stand with you, all 1,400 million whose forefathers have fought so hard, sacrificed so much to keep our independence and freedom from the yoke of colonialism and fascism.

They have 1 million? We have 10 million! They don’t own Hong Kong. We do. To support you, protect you and our common heritage, how many millions do you wish for to come? Hong Kong don’t belong to dogs. It’s the collective property of all 1,400 million and millions upon millions more before them. Our common memories and our hearts will not be erased by a bunch of dogs. Our written history, all 5,000 years of it, is littered with the Wu Sangui 吳三桂. Against them, for our own sake, we will first destroy them.

Not just you, but the future of Hong Kong and, by extension, our Motherland, our independence, sovereignty and freedom is in our hands. We will take back all that — and more!


Related image

On Patrick Shag Shanahan (above) who says:

Chinese people live under the “world’s most repressive regime” so that by the same token America must be the world’s… greatest? Most caring? Tolerant? Check out below.


Above & below: Only in China, my Beloved Motherland…

where, according to the US government and Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan, it has 1.4 billion live under the yoke of the world’s most ‘repressive regime’ while America in 2016 has the world’s most prisoners, 7 million total, 2.2 million still inside on December 31, 4.8 million released on parole. With 4% of world population it has 22% of prisoners.

Annie, that’s your America the Great. Don’t forget to get a Green Card!






Genocide 2018: Seven Indigenous children

Images of the seven missing Orang Asli children



Genocide 2019: Fourteen dead




Feeling oppressed, Uighur? Don’t worry, be happy! Your Muslim brothers of Malaysia are on the way to your rescue.

Hey, Comrade: If anyone of them as much as fart, no camp, no re-education. Just shoot the motherfucker.


The Muslim Uighur Pendatangs of China


The Muslim Malay Pendatangs of Malaysia

Image result for mohd raimi abim

Pendatang #1: Mohd Raimi of ABIM

Related image

Pendatang #2: Rais Hussin of Pakatan Harapan


Between 2009 and 2016, Uighur immigrants in China have individually and in groups committed more than 1,300 instances of ethnic and Islam motivated murders of indigenous Chinese in China. Since 2017 when we rounded them up and put them into camps, the number of Prophet Mohammad murders by Uighurs dropped to zero.

Now, both Rais and Raimi are demanding from China that we free these Uighur pendatangs:

  • Free them so that they can continue to spread their ISIS ideology?
  • So they can continue to murder in the name of Allah on Chinese streets?
  • So they can hold ordinary Chinese to ransom that if the government won’t give in to their demands they will cut more Chinese throats?


Rais, Raimi,

Uighurs are not in Petaling Street. Since you want them freed, why don’t you yourself come to unlock the gates? We wait for you. Remember to bring along Yankees and American firepower to help you. Throw in a couple of Anglos, Aussies and Taiwanese for a multi-religious, multi-ethnic force.

Or, typical of Malaiyoo bodohs, with lots of bark, no bite, you just cakap saja?


Philippines was right about those Muslims: Why waste money to feed and house them? Just kill the motherfuckers (below).

Like Americans, give them an inch, they want a yard.


On The New York Times, Malaysiakini and Thinking into Mirrors…

Journalists are not hypocrites: They are who they are…

The clip above is worth the time to listen … and it isn’t about how Deep State propaganda is spread. That’s a given.

Rather it’s about the collusion between the doyen of mass media and Deep State politicians, its spread thereof, and how the like of Joseph Lim, Rais Hussin and Steven Gan, convinced in their self-righteousness certainty, fall for this kind of absolutism. One side simply exists to reaffirms the prejudices of the other: Rais reaffirms Joseph, Joseph reaffirms Stevie, Stevie reaffirming Rais, and so on.

All sides, you see, were raised in the same narcissistic diet that if they are taught to be right, somebody must be wrong.

They call this Anglo-American attitudes, variously, as truth, independence, freedom, any of which has had far reaching consequences: be sure you are not on the wrong side or they will put you away like they have done to millions of others, past and present.


Why Harapan is not a Mirror Image of Barisan



You don’t need to know the internal mechanics of US Deep State political propaganda, but it is straightforward to understand what Jimmy Dore says in the clip about the process of media disinformation and how that actually works.

Dore is specific in talking about America and how Democrats and Hillary Clinton fixed the media in order to manipulate domestic opinion. But the issue isn’t the Clintons — motherfucker politicians do that all the time.

The problem is the media where reporters find themselves reaching out to those politicians, becoming themselves ‘agreeable’ to political slanting and spinning. Or, to restate that, the media exists to offer itself to spread the manipulation, a process they, both politicians and media, call ‘Placing the Story.’

Now, if you wonder what has that got to do with Malaysia, think again.

From where did Malaysiakini learn their journalism if not America? To Steven Gan, The New York Times is the paragon of journalism virtues. Accepting that the NYT as its moral North Star, Stevie accepts not just Anglo-American NYT morality but he must necessarily reach out his hand to the other side (Harapan is, after all, a local copycat version of Democrat neo-liberalism) to reaffirm his biases as if those biases are truths.

Transplant those notions to Malaysia, you can see where Dore is headed. It results in the same sort of manipulation.

Ordinarily, you could reply to say, ‘Well, blame the subscribers for being suckered by Stevie and so keep him afloat‘. True, Malaysiakini subscribers want to be suckered. But this Mirror of Thinking produce, in its turn, real life consequences and just two shall be cited:

  • a) There was no way a Pakatan government could have implemented its manifesto and its politicians knew that beforehand, so the ‘alternate’ media, Malaysiakini especially, had willfully and deliberately helped to disseminate the lie.
  • b) Getting its stories from Harapan’s politicians (‘Placing the Story’), Malaysiakini propagates the smear of Najib Razak, of corruption and 1MDB. Statements are smears in which the objective truth — that is, did Najib or did he not steal? — is never first affirmed. That only the accusations (someone saying something) are good enough for print makes propaganda in its turn a necessity — the necessity being ‘media freedom’.

Nobody, of course, questions (or can, or dare to question) the need for ‘media freedom’, that is, both the media and the freedom. These are thought to be as necessary as bread and rice are to life, like God is necessary to peace and solace. Like God is an end, so is freedom. And if freedom is an end, so is media an end — that among the few routes to freedom, media is absolutely indispensable in the transmission. (Wonder how the Kalahari tribesmen get their freedom, roaming all over the desert, without being able read neither in the English nor in newspapers that don’t exist?)

The inferences from that train of thought is profound. One says, What is freedom without Malaysiakini — or Steven Gan? Which is like asking, What is Allah without the Prophet? What is God without Jesus?

More than being conduits, Malaysiakini, like some desert voodoo prophet, is elevated to a holy status. Elevating something like NYT and Stevie into holy status raises serious problems with notions of objectivity and empirical truth.

It is one thing to say, “I don’t know if I am right” but it’s another altogether to say, “I have the right to print if I am not right.” (Another way of rephrasing the same thing above: “I don’t know if it’s true I’m freedom’s prophet but I have the right to say I’m the god of freedom!”)

Bad enough that the two are conflated but for the second (‘declaring the truth of saying some unknown’) to take precedence over the first (‘not knowing the truth of something’), lifts media reporting, especially reporting of lies, into a status greater than the Bible or the Quran. The last time some Caucasian Jewish nuthead who had claimed the truth to be God was arrested, tried then nailed to the cross and left there to drip blood and die. These days, instead, the authorities seek the prophets of freedom and truth; they even offer Stevie and his editors money.

Put yourself in the shoes of, say, Yeo Bee Yin or Mahathir. The reason that they chase after Stevie is self-evident: merely to accuse will turn the accuser holy but somebody has to transmit those accusations, preferably a thing independent and standalone in order for the accusations to have any credibility.

Yeo’s Christian morality is classic Anglo-American puritanism, Anglophile Mahathirism and PAS religiosity:

  • Barisan is kleptocratic, therefore Harapan must be the savior;
  • Najib is evil, therefore Mahathir must be righteous;
  • MCA is Umno’s running dog, therefore DAP and Lim Kit Siang must be Rottweiler, straight as timber;
  • Chinese are greedy and covetous, therefore Malays must be good and innocent;
  • non-Muslims threaten Islam, therefore Muslims are docile, never threatening, and so on.

Central in Malaysia’s political problems isn’t that Harapan is Barisan’s mirror image — that seems inevitable because this is like the fictional story of Eve’s creation, a woman being born out of the ribs of a man. Rather the problem appears to be this: Why was Harapan conceived from the beginning to be different from Barisan and so entrust all power to it?

A way of answering the question is to return to the mirror. Why the mirror? Because a mirror cannot function as a mirror — and therefore be called a ‘mirror’ — independent of an external object, outside the mirror. It needs to reflect something to be called a mirror for the reason we don’t call a glass window a mirror although the window, like mirror, is also made of glass. A mirror is defined by its use and function.

Look at this way then the answer to the question posed is self-evident: Malaysiakini is the mirror of Harapan, thereby hiding both the truth of itself and the latter’s beastly nature. That it is used to lie for Harapan because it was itself constructed as a mirror holding up Harapan’s image is only secondary to, and the result of, Malaysiakini being itself Harapan in reflection.

In the English, biblical phrase: One makes the image of the other.

Steven Gan’s duplicity is also the duplicity of Harapan, but both cultivate a common image as being some standalone, independent instrument for the reflection of diverse views and political positions when such an image doesn’t exist. Mirrors can only reflect that which was given to it to reflect.

In their turn, mirrors are never ontologically self-made. Like the creation of God was an invention of the human mind, so it is with Malaysiakini, constructed out of some individual prejudices (Stevie’s). Those prejudices are directly traceable back to the fundamental attitudes holding up Anglo-American supremacist racist ‘ketuanan’: Because we are right, you must be wrong.

Like God was the creation of a Lie, so are the mirrors of NYT and Malaysiakini.


Tony Blair is a respected statesman…Oops

These Anglo-American motherfuckers.









Jian and I went to a disco-karaoke!

And this came on….


Song is, 拥抱你离去 or ‘On your way out, I’ll hug you


Below, other versions of the same





The original…


Image result for 屈原

Duanwu on the Fifth Day of the Fifth Month

Sometimes Dumpling Festival, sometimes Dragon Boat, but it is the same person Qu Yuan that the Chinese nation reveres with the highest honor, yearly, for 2,300 years and so we renew our commitment to his highest ethical principles:

  • Personal Sacrifice, and
  • Loyalty to Nation till Death!


File:Li sao illustré (crop).png

Above, a 1645 reproduction copy of Li Sao 离骚 by Qu Yuan 屈原 (c. 340–278 BC). He would have used the script (below, top row), started about 3,000 years ago, and which began to evolve during the Qin era, circa 200 BCE, to the present version and the simplified form (last row).

Li Sao (Chinese characters).svg

Earlier copies, above and below. Note Qu Yuan’s original work, below, is transcribed in the present script form.

Below are the last four lines from Li Sao which could just as well have been his suicide note. In its highly structured Chinese script and stylistic and lyrical quality — i.e. you can sing it — Li Sao ranks as one of the Chinese most remarkable and literary best.

Since in that kingdom all my virtue spurn,
Why should I for the royal city yearn?
Wide though the world, no wisdom can be found.
I’ll seek the stream where once the sage was drowned.

At 373 lines and 2,400 characters (646 lines in English, 7,000 words) Li Sao is an extraordinarily long poem even by today’s standards. The themes are varied, parts autobiographical, concerning ethics and honor, purity and impermanence. A strong political undercurrent runs right through the poem.

This is to be expected because Qu Yuan was a senior official in the State of Chu, one of the three during the Warring States period. Court infighting, when it reached the king, made his position untenable. He was banished to the south, settling in Zigui, 秭归县, at present a county in Hubei province on the Yangtze, population 60 million. He threw himself into Zigui’s Miluo River.

Li Sao 离骚 has been translated variously as ‘encountering sorrow’, ‘sorrow upon departure’ and ‘estranged sorrow’. The English translation earlier was by Yang Hsien-yi and Gladys Yang both of who prefer ‘The Lament’. Last four lines in Chinese:



Li Sao as sung.



The following clips feature dance forms going back 1,500 to 2,000 years ago. The dances were actually copied and extrapolated from the frescoes, grottoes and on the walls of cave dwellings in northern China, parts of which, including dresses, headwear, and fashion jewelry were reproduced in the dancers and as stage backdrops.


So exquisite is this splendor of Chinese artistic culture that it makes look the best western dance forms as kindergarten play.



Elements of the art collectively known as Flying Aspara were dramatized in a segment of the film ‘House of Flying Daggers’.



One of the dance pieces called 采薇 caiwei, or ‘Picking Ferns‘, is so popular it has spawned varied versions, below. The term caiwei is found in a passage in the Confucius Analects.

But wei 薇 is also name to a family of ferns growing naturally at the banks of streams. Why picking? Because in the old days they wash wounds by the stream and, conveniently, you can, if you know which, pick these ferns, mesh into paste and apply as a quick relief from cuts. At a mountain stream long ago, Jian taught me to recognize those species but I forget.